This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Welcome to Pokemon Perfect, Guest!

Our motto is Pokémon Practice makes Pokémon Perfect. We are a competitive-battling community that encourages the development of players and their ideas, and fosters positive and respectful attitudes. We love Collaboration (working together), Competition (getting stronger), and Communication (being informed).

You are free to post everywhere, unless the thread explicitly states otherwise (usually in the case of a vote), and there are no private forums whatsoever. We just require you to not make multiple accounts. Let us greet you by posting a thread in the Introduce Yourself! forum.

Tiers

View Introduction to Tiers if you don't know what tiers are. Pokémon Perfect tiers are named differently to those on Smogon. A numeral followed by the letter U, e.g. 1U, 2U, 3U, represents a main tier on Pokémon Perfect – the '1' of '1U' representing the tier level. For a tier to be a main tier, it must be balanced (nothing is too powerful and game-breaking) and diverse enough (include a variety of Pokémon and strategies). A numeral followed by the letter P, e.g. 1P, 2P, 3P contain all Pokémon that are deemed overpowered in the respective 1U, 2U, 3U tiers. The 1st tier level allows Pokémon that are banned in the 2nd level, and this process continues down. Read the tier list, and in-depth explanations of the tiers naming system and tiering system. Also check out our analyses for all tiers.

Tournaments

RBY 1U Seasons and its master tournaments are responsible for starting up the community, and tournaments continue to play a big role in maintaining interest in the forums. Signups Open gives you a list of tournaments you can join, and Ongoing lists tournaments that you might want to follow. Additionally, you can tap to find out approximate Schedules for tournaments.

Well from there i still believe the ranks are currently a little mess, you can argue that Meganium or Moltres are D rank stuff but i really don't believe they should be under Quagsire, on the same rank as Sandslash or Nidoqueen at all.
The same goes to Rhydon, Golem Jynx on pair with Tentacruel or Jolteon.

Some pokemons are just proven, solid and have their good usage in very important battles, 100 times better and more used than any other of the same rank, they just can't be threated as Kingdra.

Another prime example has been Lavos winning about 4 matches from spl to wcop with Charizard, again i know how much weak it is, how much support he ask to be worth it, but do you really wanna tell me that he deserves the rank of Quagsire, Espeon or Smeargle?

My suggestion would be to rank again from C to D all of them because they currently don't make much sense, and this time stop using the rank's description to justify atrocities as Nidoqueen=Moltres

Starmie's weird in that it's an okay Water (Recover and screws Machamp) but as a Spinner it doesn't really work in the meta.

Click to expand...

Actually, starmie is the reason stalls run missy. Starmie is an excellent spinner and with a beller it can be a nuisance to many stalls or teams that like spikes up. Screwing Machamp is a rather large feat and should not be taken for granted.

Surely missy should be above the rank with like Jynx and Rhydon are in? Missy is a staple on stall teams and is fairly reliable... I just would think that would put it above Rhydon, Jynx, Tentacruel...?

Missy is a unitasker and doesnt even do that job well. It can block forry’s spin, but thats about it. With spikes and prior damage it’s frailty shows. Blissey is severely outclassed by raikou as a special wall and miltank is a much better beller. Tentacruel is a menacing sweeper and can easily 6-0 teams with the right support. Rhydon is one of the best physical walls in the game and has an above average attack unlike the others. Jynx, as Ch01w0n5h1n taught me, completely rips apart offense and with a freeze, can completely annihilate stall.

Actually, starmie is the reason stalls run missy. Starmie is an excellent spinner and with a beller it can be a nuisance to many stalls or teams that like spikes up. Screwing Machamp is a rather large feat and should not be taken for granted.

Click to expand...

Okay, sure, you've got a team with Starmie and it's running Spin. There are two cases:

1) You have a Spiker.
2) You don't have a Spiker.

In case 1 Starmie is struggling to be worthwhile, because both common Spikers can Spin and the improvement from Starmie's Spin over theirs isn't worth a whole Pokemon. In case 2 you have no Spikes and are either a bad team or shouldn't be bothering with the Spikes game at all. That's what I mean by Starmie as a Spinner not really working in the meta. If you're running Starmie, it had better be for the Machamp and generic-Water utility, not for Spin. Starmie above Forretress (with Giga Drain you can actually get 1/0 vs. Cloy; Starmie literally cannot do better than 0/0) and Miltank (you talk about bellers? This is the only good beller) is insanity.

Dragonite is going to be dropped, and Rhydon is going to B-. I am considering moving Jynx and Tenta up to B- too. Also leaning towards a Blissey drop.

I do see your point with starmie, as it is just adding more electric weaknesses and it’s spin not very useful, but case 2 seems flawed as teams with wak NEED a spinner but not always a spiker and most of them love starmie.

I do see your point with starmie, as it is just adding more electric weaknesses and it’s spin not very useful, but case 2 seems flawed as teams with wak NEED a spinner but not always a spiker and most of them love starmie.

Click to expand...

You have a point on Wak; I didn't use it or see it much back when I played so I kinda forgot about it. Still, at that point you're weighing up Starmie vs. Spin Cloy and that's not necessarily an obvious decision since Spikes are still an advantage over no Spikes.

(You could also run Rest on Wak, though you need a Beller or Sleep Talk to make it decent.)

Tentacruel can run two sets: Rapid Spin and Swords Dance (unfortunately it can't run both at the same time).

Tentacruel has a big advantage over Starmie, Cloyster, Forretress, Donphan and Golem as a spinner - it beats any set of both of the usable spikers. None of the others achieve this. This means that if you use Tentacruel as a spinner, Spikes will be out of the field if you want them to be. Period. Unfortunately, due to not being able to run Swords Dance and Rapid Spin at the same time (and not having any decent threatening options in its movepool), this means that everytime it comes in it you will be instantly forfeiting any momentum you may have - which it not exactly ideal in a spinner either. While not A material, it's still a great spinner that should always be considered, specially in stall teams.

The Swords Dance set can be very dangerous. This thing is very fast (speed ties Miltank and Zapdos), has Surf to make stuff like Steelix think twice before coming to phaze it and Sludge Bomb's poison chance is great too. Royally screwed by stuff like Raikou and Gengar and struggling to get past Skarmory (only 23% to 3HKO) are its main problems, but it can still be really dangerous with its speed and ability to boost its attack so quickly without becoming slower or sacrificing HP.

All in all a great Pokemon, definitely has its place in OU and should definitely rise in the rankings.

D -> C+

Another Pokemon that you don't see very often but performs its role well. Meganium has one purpose: support. Most commonly seen running a moveset in the likes of Synthesis, Reflect, Razor Leaf, Leech Seed, it does a great job at Reflecting in front of any physical attacker except Heracross, something Raikou struggles more with due to not having instant recovery and Earthquake being so common. Grass is also a great type defensively, resisting Ground and Electric moves (and although most electric type move users run coverage, it's usually weak coverage in the form of Hidden Power). The excellent screen support it provides is great for stall teams, who appreciate it to control a threat for some time, or sweepers, who may use the turns to set up a sweep to win. Underrated, fun Pokemon.

C+ -> B-

Jynx has one interesting niche over other sleepers - it screws up the most common sleep blocker, Zapdos. This means that Jynx is more likely to put something relevant to sleep. 110 base Special Attack is no joke either, with a great duo of STABs to work with too. It's also able to run Thief and steal an item from a counter - something like a Snorlax is a perfect Thief target - as well as Substitute to play mind games and shield itself from moves. Not the easiest Pokemon to use but it has its place in OU for sure.

Golem might deserve a rise to B- too - it's actually a good spinner, I just haven't used it enough to feel I can write about it. Charizard also seems better that the rest of C-, maybe it deserves C+? Not very sure on this one though.

Another Pokemon that you don't see very often but performs its role well. Meganium has one purpose: support. Most commonly seen running a moveset in the likes of Synthesis, Reflect, Razor Leaf, Leech Seed, it does a great job at Reflecting in front of any physical attacker except Heracross, something Raikou struggles more with due to not having instant recovery and Earthquake being so common. Grass is also a great type defensively, resisting Ground and Electric moves (and although most electric type move users run coverage, it's usually weak coverage in the form of Hidden Power). The excellent screen support it provides is great for stall teams, who appreciate it to control a threat for some time, or sweepers, who may use the turns to set up a sweep to win. Underrated, fun Pokemon.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, it does literally nothing against setup mons as it doesnt force many pokemon out. Synthesis has 8pp, which severely hinders it’s potential. That said, it outperforms many D mons but probably deserves C-.

I will move jynx up because of popular demand, and tenta fits in B- too, so up they go.

Also, I really feel that blissey is too high as it is outclassed by raikou and/or snorlax.

Unfortunately, it does literally nothing against setup mons as it doesnt force many pokemon out.

Click to expand...

This isn't really true. Leech Seed is a massive pain for setup 'mons, and Meganium can counter-setup with screens. Stuff like Rhydon and Steelix absolutely is forced out, because even if Meganium doesn't run an attack they can't break it and Leech Seed is stealing health they can't get back. Electrics are totally walled if you have Light Screen - you barely even need Synthesis - and you can choose what you want to use to hit back.

The lack of Synthesis PP (and even Leech Seed PP) is a huge problem for Meganium, certainly, but as a wall there's very little else wrong with it (you can lay Spikes on it or Spin, but that's about it). Jorgen really said it best:

Jorgen said:

It almost doesn't matter that it can't do offense because it doesn't let the opponent do offense either.

Click to expand...

I'd actually recommend Meganium more for an offense team than a stall team. Meganium is a button you push that says "your momentum is dead, my turn to try something", and it's a button you can push on an awful lot of things.

Also, I really feel that blissey is too high as it is outclassed by raikou and/or snorlax.

Click to expand...

It doesn't really compete with Snorlax; it liberates Snorlax from Electric duty, allowing you to use a more offensive set. Raikou's the one overshadowing Blissey, and Blissey does Bell. It could probably fall a bit, but not a lot; it's miles better than everything in D (except Meganium, which should probably rise a little).

Yes, it GETS walled as easily as it does walling itself, but the value it can bring to a team core (especially 2x flying-type ones) is unmatched by any peers it is currently listed next to. Unlike Kangaskhan to Lax, Clefable to Lax, and Meganium to Eggy, Quag is not just an inferior Steelix. Opens up totally different ways to build with the strong defensive typing and movepool. I thought the era of ignorance was over.

Quag Is flames, no doubt about it. The lower tiers are still a bit screwed up, so they do need fixing. The problem you've found is actually kanga being too high. Quag is on par with other monsters in it's tier such as charizard and clef. Kang needs to move down, its kinda bad as a curse roarer and doesn't fit on teams.

Also, I saw you insult muk. Muk is an amazing poke and with its moveset can rip holes through the mightiest of stalls.

Meganium and eggy play so differently its not even funny. Clef also plays differently from lax. Quag has blissey syndrome where it shuts down a lot of pokes but also gets walled hard. I guess drum can be theatening, but depending on the set it gets forced out and with chip it dies too easily. It literally has two sets, and diversity is nonexistent as the sleep talk set doesn't need to be considered as a pokemon (free switch in for literally anything)

I created a tier list chart similar to the style of fighting game tiers. I made Y-axis = power, X-axis = versatility.
It's a lot nicer to look at and gives a better idea of how the meta looks (at least in my opnion) than scrolling down a standard list, such as the one on the OP. It's not perfect yet, but maybe it could be an imporvement to the gen thread. I'll post it if we're interested in discussing.

With and without sprites - Album on Imgur
Fairly certain high power (both offensive and defensive) is more valued in the gsc meta, so the colors reflect that, making those mons in the top-left midsection closer to the green. My expectation was not to take over the thread with this, but to add a new perspective & dimension to tiering.
It may look 'sloppy' at first glance, but it actually looks better this way than with smaller icons + a bigger grid; I tried it both ways. Plus, it's the way the other games do it.

Tentacruel has a big advantage over Starmie, Cloyster, Forretress, Donphan and Golem as a spinner - it beats any set of both of the usable spikers. None of the others achieve this. This means that if you use Tentacruel as a spinner, Spikes will be out of the field if you want them to be. Period.

Click to expand...

This is not quite true. Tentacruel certainly prevents either Spiker from re-laying Spikes as it Spins them, is immune to Toxic, and doesn't really care about Pursuit, but it can be spinblocked and as such it is possible to keep Spikes against Tentacruel in at least the short term.

Spiker only vs. Tentacruel = no Spikes ever
Spiker + Pursuit vs. Tentacruel = no Spikes ever
Spiker + Ghost vs. Tentacruel = probably Spikes in short term, depends on sets for long term
Spiker + Ghost vs. Tentacruel + Pursuit = maybe Spikes in short term, but not in long term

There is no such thing as a “perfect spinner.” Tentacruel just happens to be one of the better ones. The reason starmie sees slightly more usage as a spinner is that it can 2hko gengar and has recover, which is actually a big thing.

I've said this before, and I guess I'll say it again, I've never seen the point of these. What you guys should do is make a list of the most popular teams used, and rank those instead. It would be way more useful.

Gengar is too highly used for Tenta to be the best spinner, from what I've seen.

Agree with Roostur too. A teams ranking would be interesting for a lot of reasons. It'd hopefully spark more talk too, because while standard tier lists are good for what they are, the conversations can be short, and decisive or dismissive. The board could use something fresh.

There are SOO many teams to consider when making a ranking like that. Breaking teams down into cores makes the rankings a lot more subjective than we want them to be.

Click to expand...

Absolutely untrue. This way of doing things is subjective. For example you guys will undoubtedly rank ampharos low. Yet, I've used Ampharos on a team to beat many top players of the time that I was playing. It was very successful for me. What we have right now is what Nobel Prize winning economist, Milton Friedman, called "Tyranny of the status quo". This often irrational way of keeping things the same when there are better alternatives.

Absolutely untrue. This way of doing things is subjective. For example you guys will undoubtedly rank ampharos low. Yet, I've used Ampharos on a team to beat many top players of the time that I was playing. It was very successful for me. What we have right now is what Nobel Prize winning economist, Milton Friedman, called "Tyranny of the status quo". This often irrational way of keeping things the same when there are better alternatives.

Click to expand...

I mean rankings of any sort are subjective, but when ranking individual pokemon, the thing you are ranking is objective- there's nothing subjective about Ampharos existing. When ranking teams/cores I believe you'll often run into issues surrounding what the team/core you're discussing should actually be, before you even consider where it should be ranked relative to everything else.

In any case, I don't see how this would be feasible due to the sheer quantity of things to be considered, not to mention the fact that assessing entire cores/teams is both difficult to do through experience, and difficult in terms of the complexity involved, making it harder to theorise as well.

I mean rankings of any sort are subjective, but when ranking individual pokemon, the thing you are ranking is objective- there's nothing subjective about Ampharos existing. When ranking teams/cores I believe you'll often run into issues surrounding what the team/core you're discussing should actually be, before you even consider where it should be ranked relative to everything else.

In any case, I don't see how this would be feasible due to the sheer quantity of things to be considered, not to mention the fact that assessing entire cores/teams is both difficult to do through experience, and difficult in terms of the complexity involved, making it harder to theorise as well.

Click to expand...

Ideally we would only rank teams that were popular. Instead of looking at pokemon usage in tournaments, we would look at team usage instead and only rank teams that were above a certain threshold of usage. Unless of course a team happened to be the most successful team in the tournament, then it would of course be helpful to rank it too, even if it’s usage was low. In fact a combination of usage and success in determining which teams were ranked would be ideal. I don't think an increase in difficulty is a good reason for not adopting this system. It will be a far better way of theorizing how we actually play the game.